On 7-29-13 I decided to pass out leaflets in downtown Nashville. I openly carried a molded kydex rifle case on my back with a ballistic vest. I purchased the ballistic vest because Tennessee cops have repeatedly pointed guns at me. It would be foolish not to wear a ballistic vest. I was detained once for about 20 minutes and let go. I then proceeded to do an interview with news channel 5. I then continued to pass out leaflets and was walking back to my vehicle when I was stopped by a crazy cop. He detained me, while his henchmen removed my sealed locked rifle case and pried it open without permission. They saw a suppressor attached to an AR15 rifle inside the case. I was arrested for the silencer even though form 3 paperwork was inside the case. I am an FFL NFA dealer and pay the SOT. The cops said that since the case appeared to maybe have a rifle in it they were justified in opening it. I was arrested and bonded out at about 5am on 7-30-13.

I have broke no law and believe the DA has not dropped the charges for fear of a federal lawsuit.

He’s got balls, I’ll give him that. I’m on his side as far as “the law is the law” goes, and I hate guilty until proven innocent type things like this involving the police. I really don’t know what he expects to get out of these little demonstrations? Has any police officer ever got fired yet after any interaction with him? Doubtful. Have the laws changed for the better because of gun related trolls like him? Definitely not. Does he have the power to change laws with demonstrations like this? Again, that’s doubtful. In the end it seems like the focus of these demonstrations is really to get shot (and obviously live), or troll hard enough to corner an officer into doing or saying something he shouldn’t, sue and then cash in. That’s what may have happened here.

LOL this is the rifle “case” he made from scratch using a vacuum forming machine it looks like he may have built for the purpose:

That’s next level open carry trolling when you go out of your way to even make your case form fit your rifle.

This all seems like a real waste of everyone’s time, including Leonard’s own.

On 7-29-13 I decided to pass out leaflets in downtown Nashville. I openly carried a molded kydex rifle case on my back with a ballistic vest. I purchased the ballistic vest because Tennessee cops have repeatedly pointed guns at me. It would be foolish not to wear a ballistic vest. I was detained once for about 20 minutes and let go. I then proceeded to do an interview with news channel 5. I then continued to pass out leaflets and was walking back to my vehicle when I was stopped by a crazy cop. He detained me, while his henchmen removed my sealed locked rifle case and pried it open without permission. They saw a suppressor attached to an AR15 rifle inside the case. I was arrested for the silencer even though form 3 paperwork was inside the case. I am an FFL NFA dealer and pay the SOT. The cops said that since the case appeared to maybe have a rifle in it they were justified in opening it. I was arrested and bonded out at about 5am on 7-30-13.

I have broke no law and believe the DA has not dropped the charges for fear of a federal lawsuit.

I’m confused. You say they “pried it open without permission” and “saw a suppressor attached to an AR15 rifle inside the case,” and you also say the “form 3 paperwork [for the suppressor] was inside the case.” Why then, are they asking you repeatedly for that paperwork? Which is it? I understand that you say they’re not allowed to ask you for it, and I’m not arguing that point. My question is because the points of your story are inconsistent. Did they get it open? Was the paperwork inside it? Why were they asking for the paperwork if they’d gotten it open and the paperwork was inside?

I saw them pry the case open, however I was in the back of a cop car after they put the cuffs on me. I am stating that the form 3 was in the case. Seriously, does anyone think there are many sakers on the black market? I have already reported the one seized as missing inventory within the 48 hr window that the ATF allows.

I watched it end to end. I cannot see the case, nor see what’s happening. I heard them ask you, over and over, for your paperwork. That indicates to me that either (a) they hadn’t gotten the case open yet or (b) they had, and found no paperwork. There is nothing in the video from which to determine which one of those options it is. Your comment quite clearly states the things I quoted, that they pried it open, that they saw the suppressor, and that the paperwork was in the case. None of those three things were evident in the video. So I’m asking, IN THE VIDEO, when they were asking you for your paperwork and you were ignoring/refusing to provide it, was that PRIOR to them “prying the case open” or not? I cannot see the case, I don’t know. Did they have the case open already when they asked for the paperwork? If they did, where was the paperwork that you claim was inside?

It’s not a hard question, and it may have a simple answer. That’s what I’m asking for.

They took the rifle from my back. I told them I did not consent to any searches. They cut the tape sealing the case and removed the sling. Then they had to physically pull the kydex apart, which is no small feat. It was at that point they started asking for the paperwork for the silencer. I asserted my fifth amendment right in the matter. Up until that point nothing was said about a silencer. Then they put me in handcuffs and stuffed me in the cop car.

Later in holding I saw the magistrate at about 9pm who gave them authorization to cut the lock on the case so they could access the receiver and charging handle. That is where the paperwork was located. They waited for the warrant to be issued so the evidence of a loaded gun would not be thrown out. However, the gun was unloaded and the form 3 was sitting right there.

In discovery, or the preliminary hearing the cops will testify that the gun was unloaded and that the form 3 papers were in the case.

THERE IS NO LAW REQUIRING I SHOW THE FORM 3 TO LOCAL POLICE. THE LAW STATES I MUST RETaiN THE PAPERWORK.

What is wrong with the case? The case was made from kydex. The kydex covered every part of the firearm and no part of the firearm was visible. A cable lock was placed on the kydex case so that the firearm could not be used. The sling was strapped in two places over the kydex case, preventing the case from being opened. As a final touch I placed tape around the case at six points to ensure cops did not attempt to open it.

I think the issue is that case covered every part of the firearm like the yoga pants covering every part of the ass on the girl ahead of me in the check out line. I can see just about everything going on in there.

I admit to not watching the video as I’ve grown weary of these hidden camera types who intentionally take LE officers away from legitimate preventive patrol, especially those trying to grab a brass ring and/or make an already hard job more difficult. For the most part, I think officers are acting in good faith when they encounter people like this; this type of encounter is something of a rarity with the exception of a few jurisdictions where open carry is the norm.

I’m with you on this. I started watching but stopped barely more than a minute into it. As a guy that makes it a point to read and watch before arguing, that’s saying something.

I’ve seen nothing from this open carry, live-action trolling that makes me feel that my Constitutional rights are being fought for or protected in by these folks. What’s the end game? “Awareness?” Does that cop strike you as an enforcer of “the police state?” Is the American public made more secure by screaming “detained this and detained that” and invoking the 5th Amendment when a police officer stops you to ask a few simple questions?

Nothing about open carry trolling does anything to forward 2nd Amendment rights or raise “awareness” in a healthy, useful way. Tell me what anti-gun or neutral party would watch this and think, “you know, those gun owners really do have a good point about the 2nd Amendment and seem like a reasonable, responsible group of folks.” It’s one thing to open carry your pistol on your hip and know the rules and laws when confronted. It’s something completely different to seek battle on the grounds of the Constitution by strapping a rifle (a “scary, evil, black rifle of death” no less) to your back and parading it in front of everyone. This isn’t helping anything. Just because you can do something, doesn’t mean you ought to.

Time and time again you cops and cop lovers get on here and moan and complain about people invoking their Constitutional rights. The rights that many great Americans have proudly laid down their lives to defend. In my opinion you are disrespecting those brave men by not exercising those rights yourself and you might as well piss on their graves when you speak out against others for choosing to. Leonard, personally I think you’re an arrogant weirdo, but thanks for standing up for all of us!

Tell me one thing about the gay pride day/parade displays that would make someone more tolerant of gays, lesbians, etc? Answer: there isn’t any. In fact there are quite a few public displays that would get heterosexual individuals arrested for public indecency on any other day/location. Yet anyone with a critical word about it is a bigot, homophobic, or anti-gay. Some groups get to do what they want and then demand respect despite violating the law.

If this guy wants to tread right up to the line of the law, that’s his business. He could have probably handled his interaction with the LEO better, while still asserting his rights.

Go back to playing cawadooty you fucking nerd. It’s guys like you that get open carry outlawed, look at California. Yea, you’re a real hero. I’m sure you get all the chicks over at the world of warcraft forums. Cheese dick douche bag.

So blame people who exercise their rights for loosing the same rights, once the retards in Sacramento get wind of it? What’s the point of having the right to do something, if everyone is too afraid to use if for fear of loosing that right? Is everyone supposed to get together and make sure there aren’t too many folks open carrying at the same time on the same day?

I mean the law is the law and all and if you have the right to do so then do so! But what next time a maniac uses the law on his side, walks away from the officer open carrying, and shoots the fuck out of a mall or school? I’m all for the right but I mean the office needs to keep people safe does he not? I don’t know how to feel on this matter but all I can say is I’d be more polite with the officer.

“I measure a mans love of liberty not by how vigorously he defends the honorable, but by how vigorously he defends the despicable.” This man did nothing illegal and had his rights violated. It does not matter if he was uncooperative and indignant, or that he was doing things to attract attention. The officers should not have searched his possessions or detained him without cause. “Being a stupid ass” is not cause, nor is “contempt of cop”. He had all his paperwork in order, and honestly other than the suppressor paperwork the cops had no legal right to ask for or see anything. If they truly felt “in their gut” (which I will point out is not considered evidence admissible in court) that he was a threat they should have followed him until he actually did something illegal. That is how it is supposed to work, and that is what they get paid to do. They are not “preemptive enforcement” they are emergence *response*.

I fully support him in his quest to bring attention to this topic, not because I think it is the brightest way to do it, but because he is exercising his natural rights, and those should not be violated. (of course he must also remember that the cops have a right to ask him questions, just as he has a right to not answer them.)

Everybody’s a Constitutional lawyer it seems. No one is arguing FOR violating an individual’s God given rights, but I can tell you from first hand experience, these are difficult gray areas to traverse in real time, out on the street, and without the luxury of afterthought. Indeed, the balancing of privacy and individual liberty with protecting the public isn’t so clear cut. I was third man in the door of the nation’s worst active shooter incident in US shopping mall history in ’07 (12 shot, eight dead, a ninth if you count the murderer). I submit to you, the cops depicted here had a moral and professional obligation to momentarily detain and question the individual. Had they not, had this troll had a more malicious heart and brought that weapon to bear on innocents, the LE community would be criticized for that too. Walk a mile with me…

I agree Jeff, as a law enforcement officer it seems like you really can’t win. Either you’re doing too much and overstepping boundaries, or when something happens then the public is going to look to jump on you for not doing enough. It’s a slippery slope though. 2:54 in the video is a perfect example; the “MAYBE EVEN A BOMB!” comment. Is carrying a backpack for instance enough that you could stop someone and search them on reasonable suspicion they might have a bomb in it? What about for carrying a box? A girl with a purse? I don’t know… I just don’t like where this seems to be headed. What are your thoughts?

@ ENDO-Mike, at the end of the day YOU are responsible for yourself.
Everyone else is hired help.

Slippery has a wet slide. Anytime we start stopping people due to fear, we lose. Tragic things happen, people die. But when you have a culture that has massive amounts of media hell bent of showing violence and revenge, it’s no wonder people snap and start killing people.

Eventually saying you “hate” someone could be a crime, because it could lead to violence in some people’s eyes.

Exactly this. The question you have to ask yourself is this, are we in Orwell’s 1984 or aren’t we? You are correct in that they had an obligation to detain and ascertain whether he was a threat or not (and being cooperative goes a long way towards making the process smoother and faster – of which he had no obligation to). You have admitted to not watching the video yet you give your opinion in support of the officers – a nice example of the blue wall if there ever was one. Typical.

P.S. – As always Mike, thanks for all you do bringing us choice material day in and day out.

Edit- Omitted the point that after they had ascertained that there was no law being broken, he was still arrested and charged. Tell me what the police did right in this situation? And a note of common sense, no active shooter has to my knowledge open carried to the site of their crimes and begun handing out pamphlets….

exactly! The police could have been aware of the laws and let him go after they made initial contact. Its very tough to be a cop, but arresting someone for a charge we will figure out later is not an option.

“Maybe even a bomb”??? Rifle case + body armor = bomb? He also calls is a “bullet proof vest,” (no such thing) instead of body armor.

“I’m in fear for my life right now.” What an overly dramatic puss.

Once the detainee became uncooperative he/they were just looking for a reason to arrest/charge him with a crime so they could be done with the situation. They may have opened an even larger can of worms by making the arrest.

To my knowledge no psycho has ever been open carrying on his way to where he was shooting. That would be stupid because the cops would likely show up and stop them before the even got started.
Guys like this are just trolling. They want to have their rights violated for either money or publicity. Like you said that takes police off of ore important duties while they feed the troll. This really is something police departments should probably start briefing officers on, particularly in areas where these trolls are active.
I’m also very wary of these “grey” areas. It often starts grey and rare and then becomes commonplace. Look at no knock-warrants and federal wiretapping. I’m not saying things like that don’t have a place, but you have to be very, very carful in “grey” areas.

The issue that people are taking exception with is the FACT that you are out looking for a confrontation with a LEO, in order to beat him up with the Constitution. And don’t even argue this point with me.

Here’s a question for you…… What was on the leaflets that you were passing out? And don’t give me any crap about info regarding open carry, it was way to small to provide an adequate amount of information. I’m betting it was to plug your kydex business.

It would be one thing if you were out handing out leaflets about open carry, and engaging in conversations with people, besides the news, and educating them about the 2A. If you talk to them about open carry, and the laws of your area, that’s where the good can be done! If you would interact with the officer, talk to him, and politely cooperate with him, WHILE you are pointing out where he is possibly infringing on your rights, in a friendly way, that would be constructive. Instead, you tie his hands and force him to make a spot judgement call on whether you are a loon, or a normal guy. When you tie his hands like that, I will support the officer every time. What you are doing is destructive to the reputation and relationship of all gun owners. You’re missing out on a perfect moment to TEACH and INFORM the officers about local laws, and the Constitution. While it would be nice, you can’t expect these guys to know every single law in their area. And it’s not their fault, it’s the idiots that pass 5,000 useless ones that make it impossible for the common man to keep up with them.

My situation….. I deal with the border patrol all of the time where I live. They request searches of my vehicle (without probable cause) on a regular basis, and are surprised when I say no. (nobody ever tells them no) They ask where I’m going, and where I’m coming from, to which I answer North, South, East, or West. I don’t get indigent with them, I use it as a moment to teach them about the Constitution and a citizen’s rights. It’s always been a friendly conversation, and generally they say thanks for the info afterwards. You have to remember, we’re getting into the generations in which most of these people haven’t been taught this stuff.

I watched all three videos. You did not do ANY teaching. I agree with you on all of your points, but STRONGLY disagree with your methods. The video in which you didn’t get arrested was slightly better, but you were also less of a jerk.

What about, “Officer, I will comply with your request, even though it’s unlawful, but first, just very quickly, I need you to listen to me about what the Constitution and law actually says, versus what you have been taught. Then I will comply with your request, even though it’s unlawful, in the interest of keeping you calm and feeling safe.” Have a pamphlet for him so that he can look it up himself, after he’s done with you. Look, I’m a hardcore Libertarian, but at the same time I have and use common sense and courtesy, which unfortunately a lot of Libertarians don’t. You turn people off when you present your info the way that you are.

And no, it doesn’t have to be a boring video. It can be instructional for other folks, on how to politely educate, and slightly resist, the police in their unlawful detentions and searches. Best of luck dude.

Not that I’ve seen. Most of the normal guys don’t have time to do stuff like this. Nor do they OC a vacuum formed case. But I feel inspired to make a video of interacting with the border patrol at a checkpoint. Lots of similar douche-bag videos on that subject. And several douche-bag border-patrol agents.

Mako, I have found videos that do just what you mentioned. They are done by a group called Open Carry Texas. The video’s “mood” tends to be dictated by the officer. Some are very friendly, others get more confrontational. Their most recent one is a great example. They’ve even got cards that they hand out to the officers. One of the page admins is the Sgt that was arrested in Temple, TX while out hiking with his kid. Good stuff.https://www.facebook.com/OpenCarryTexas?hc_location=stream

Did you inform the police you were audio recording? Is it not considered wiretapping in your state if you don’t? Or is recording audio in public allowed by law in your state?

I am surprised the police allowed you to keep the recording, did they find it when you were arrested? Did you have to fight to have the recording given back to you? Is the recording going to be used as evidence in your trial? (I assume not or they wouldnt have returned it to you?)

Get a LIFE! What is the POINT of this exercise? Can you carry an AR15 inside a case around a city? Yes, you can, but why WOULD you? Trying to freak people out is the only reason I can see. Cmon man, leave the AR15 at home. I have three, they stay in my safe, and one that stays in a locked safe in my trunk. Use your brains, you’re making other gun owners look like idiots. If you have an issue, then do the smart thing and hire a lawyer, or obtain a permit to hold a demonstration and protest whatever it is you don’t like. Use the First to it’s full advantage, and arm yourself well with the Second.

Every call is different. No set of circumstances are the same. In the days after Boston, we were deluged with 911 calls about people with backpacks in churches, restaurants, shopping malls, public spaces, etc. Each of these situations required a high degree of professionalism and a delicate hand to navigate. Of the assorted calls of this nature we fielded, my guys encountered not only cooperation, but sincere empathy. It’s worth noting, the political posturing of IACP, PERF and CALEA notwithstanding, almost all street cops support the 2nd Amendment and concealed carry for private citizens. We’re on your side, and our enemy is legion. Instead of funneling a beat cop into dangerous administrative and/or legal waters, I urge people to use their time and resourcefulness to fight the toxin we know as liberalism instead!

Not to justify Embody’s exact method for trolling cops, but these guys do serve a productive purpose, and they did make a difference in CA despite legislation to the contrary (cops don’t make laws). I for one, did educate and train a police department in how to respond to a ‘man with a gun’ call by my open carry activities (not for trolling, but for actual protection). Because of my protesting and even some letter writing to a northern CA PD, they did constructively change their approach and it appears that I did in fact educate them on the limitations of their 12089 (loaded gun) check, and the scope of their detention. Many “OCers” produced favorable education that at the very least, kept other OCers from being slammed down to the pavement and detained and humiliated and cursed upon for a non-issue. And YES, pulling cops away from their duties (donuts or bad guys) IS ok to do. And NO, that cop doesn’t have the right to be such a pansy and pretend his life is in danger just to give him probable cause. So damned sick of that “i want to make it home to my family tonight” crap. Choose a different line of work.

Those last two sentences are pretty bold coming from some morbidly obese internet commando. Yea, I’m pretty sick of hearing all the soldiers, marines, sailors, and airmen saying they want to come home alive too. They should probably go choose a different line of work as well. But I guess since the only bullets and gunfire you have ever faced stop at your mom’s tv screen, having the will to survive wouldn’t make sense to you. Well, maybe a will to survive your type II diabetes might make sense.

So when these drama queen cops use that excuse of wanting to come home to their kids, even when there’s no threat, and your rights are not as important as that safe trip home while they’re in the line of work where that’s an acceptable risk…THAT’s ok with you then tough guy? And yeah, I hope you’re not really with MakoGroup because you are making an ass of yourself and diminishing the name of that cheap-ass plastic toy making company.

I wonder how most of the “Read The Constitution, Asshole” crowd would react if someone in body armor and a rifle over their back approached their house and banged on their front door a couple of times.

Leonard Embody cares nothing about rights. He is just hoping the cops mess up so he can sue them. He is an opportunistic, self-serving, antagonising, poor excuse for a human being. I hope he sues and gets rich. Then I hope he buys a big nice house in a great neighborhood. I hope he meets a woman to help him spend that money. I hope she makes him happier than he can possibly imagine and they get married. I then hope she leaves him for a cop and takes everything in the divorce.

Fact #1 – In TN it’s illegal to carry a loaded rifle. Embody also lost his handgun permit privileges in TN.

Fact #2 – Several 911 calls were made to law enforcement because of his actions that day.

Fact #3 – In TN it’s illegal to possess a silencer. It’s a defense to possessing a silencer if you have the appropriate ATF paperwork. Read the TN law 39-17-1302 (prohibited weapons).

Fact #4 – When asked to produce the paperwork to legally own the silencer, he refused to answer. Sure that’s his legal right, but it’s also the right of the officers to arrest him for possessing it since he would not produce any evidence that said he could legally own it at the time of the arrest. Again, read TN law. I’m sure he will produce the paperwork when he goes to court, but the officers had plenty of PC to arrest at the time of the video. Even if they discovered the paperwork later, the arrest had been made. A separate warrant was obtained to break the lock to clear the weapon and make sure it wasn’t loaded. It’s my understanding that Embody hid the paperwork in the locked area.

He attempts to bait LEOs. The LEOs on the scene acted well within their authority. He will find that out soon enough. Go ahead and file a lawsuit. I will put money on the table six days a week and twice on Sunday that he loses just as he did the last one against the park ranger.

Regardless of the kydex case he attempted to make, any reasonable person would be alarmed at the site of a man walking around in the middle of downtown Nashville with body armor on and carrying an assault rifle.

Again Leonard, you have some serious issues and I encourage you to seek mental help.

quoted from SgtScott31
“Regardless of the kydex case he attempted to make, any reasonable person would be alarmed at the site of a man walking around in the middle of downtown Nashville with body armor on and carrying an assault rifle.”

And this is irrelevant. I know this is not your main point, but I hate when this gets brought up when we are arguing actual law and not what some dumbass Joe citizen thinks.

I do not know TN law so your main point maybe correct, but I would love to see sources for the law in Fact #4. The suppressor may have been his undoing for a lawsuit. It depends on what he has to provide and possibly if the court finds that he was arrested unlawfully prior to them even asking for the paperwork. Timing of the tape seems to indicate the officer says he was detaining him well before he asked for paperwork.

The source for #4 is state law. Read 39-17-1302. It’s illegal to possess a silencer. A defense to that is if he has ATF documentation. It’s not the LEO’s job to provide defenses for someone they’re investigating. They asked during the investigation (while he was being detained) if he had documentation to indicate he could legally possess it. He refused to answer. He was arrested for possessing it. It’s not rocket science. If he has ATF documentation then it can be shown as evidence during court proceedings as a defense to the criminal charge. He was detained until he refused to provide proof he could legally possess the silencer. Then he was arrested. Whether you believe he should have been detained or not is something we will probably agree to disagree on. I guarantee you the TN courts and federal courts (if embody feels the need to file a 1983 claim again) will rule in the officers’ favor (again).

So there’s no innocent until proven guilty concept in TN law? There’s no due process that requires you to first have suspicion that his gun was loaded before doing a loaded check – the silencer, the NFA paperwork – the gun, because of a gun shaped case? Granted, he’s got priors showing he’s had guns, so you have that one.

As far as citizens calls, your department needs to do one simple thing to prevent your headaches and his trolling – ask the callers if he’s acting in a threatening way or if they actually see something illegal. Walking around with a gun shaped case and body armor does not equate to alarm if he’s passing out fliers and certainly doesn’t equate to suspicion of a crime which would give you your right to stop and question him. Or is TN worse than CA? All the above described behaviors you make in searching this dude is against the law in CA, and that’s pretty sad.

Also, I doubt the correct word for the legality of a silencer/supressor is “illegal.” Obviously it can be legal with the proper licensure. If it’s licenseable, then you should call it “restricted” like it is everywhere else.

It is the correct wording. Yes it can be legal with the proper licensure, but the state law can only be interpreted one way. Directly from 39-17-1302 (you can look it up on michie.com)

39-17-1302. Prohibited weapons.

(a) A person commits an offense who intentionally or knowingly possesses, manufactures, transports, repairs or sells: (5) a firearm silencer.

Now subsecton (b) says the following:

It is a defense to prosecution under this section that the person’s conduct:
(7) Involved acquisition or possession of a sawed-off shotgun, sawed-off rifle, machine gun or firearm silencer that is validly registered to the person under federal law in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Records. A person who acquires or possesses a firearm registered as required by this subdivision (b)(7) shall retain proof of registration; or…

Now in my opinion had he provided the proper documenation for the suppressor and allowed the officers to verify the rifle was unloaded, he would have been on his way. I guess in your mind even though the officers couldn’t verify that the rifle was loaded or that he could legally possess the suppressor they just should have assumed he could and let him go on his way. Wow, a whole new way of policing. I should just assume that person driving without a license has a valid one. I should assume the person telling me he only had two beers was being honest and let him drive on his merry way without further investigating. That makes my job a whole lot easier.

I’m not with MNPD, but I’m with another agency in Nashville/Davidson Co. With that said, MNPD doesn’t need numerous MWAG calls to stop and detain. It’s illegal to carry a loaded rifle in most cases. They had the right to stop him just for that. They didn’t know whether he could access the rifle with that case or not. He locked the rifle so they couldn’t verify whether it was loaded and he refused to answer any questions about the suppressor. Both are violations of TN law.

Many gun advocates don’t like the way TN laws are written about guns. Another case in point, it’s illegal to carry a handgun. That’s how 39-17-1307 is written. A defense to 39-17-1307 is if you have a valid handgun carry permit. So if a LEO sees a person carrying a fiream, whether openly or concealed, he can stop that person, detain, and verify that they’re carrying legally by checking their permit. You may not agree with it, but that’s how it is. Does it happen often? not really, but LEOs can do that here.

I happen to be a title II weapon dealer. The Form 3 is not required to be shown or presented to the police. Federal agents investigating a crime yes. Which is why TN law requires that the paperwork be RETAINED, not presented upon demand.

Yes, absolutely, you should indeed let people go their way while carrying a rifle on their back unless you can articulate probable cause that it’s loaded and then stop and search. What is the deal with you thinking it’s ok to stop and search without cause? That’s what makes people crazy and hate on cops so much. There’s nothing constitutional about a government agent stopping someone without PC. it’s not rocket science. Your example of a drunk is much different, you already have your PC for that. The unlicensed driver you assume doesn’t have one could only be found out before you pulled him over so I’m not sure how that equates to the same thing as stopping and searching someone without PC. Yes, if you can’t find PC for stopping someone, hell yes, let them go…it is not constitutional to stop them…its not like it’s your job to protect people, you write reports and shoot dogs in houses you raid accidentally, right? JK, had to do the jab at the end there. But the rest is sincere.

You’re right, it doesn’t have to be presented to police when they demand it. If you don’t want to show any proof that you can legally own it, then the LEOs did what they should have done. They arrested you and made you prove it in court.

You would like to think I’m a guard. I would gladly wager a friendly bet as to the outcome of any lawsuit you feel the need to file involving this situaton.

The law does not require me to show it to anyone except the feds. Tennessee law says ” retain”. With the idea that if the local cops want to make a case they will refer it to the feds. In any case the police are in possession of the form 3 at this time because it was in the case.

Jp I’m not sure you understand. First I don’t need probable cause to stop and detain someone. I need reasonable suspicion. There’s a difference. Observing someone with a rifle without knowing if it’s loaded is plenty of reasonable suspicion to stop, detain and verify it’s not loaded. It’s illegal to carry a loaded rifle unless you’re hunting, transporting, etc. The officers on scene did not know if it was loaded so they stopped him to verify. They could not verify whether there was a round in the chamber because he put some sort of lock on it. They observed what appeared to be a suppressor which is also illegal to possess. They asked if he could provide the paperwork to prove he could legally possess the suppressor and he refused to answer. So the detention (which only requires reasonable suspicion) turned into an arrest for the suppressor. The arresting officer obtained a warrant to get the lock off the weapon to verify whether it was loaded or not. The bottom line is that he was detained because the officers believed he was carrying a loaded rifle, which is illegal. While he was being detained the suppressor was discovered. Although they did not have to the officers asked about the ATF paperwork. Since he refused to provide proof he could legally possess the suppressor he was arrested. Now he can provide that documentation in court as a defense per TN law. I’m not sure why that’s so hard to understand.

It’s difficult to understand because, as you stated, TN laws are backwards. Just the simple act of having a handgun on your person is automatically illegal and you are undoubtedly committing a crime, so therefore, if you have one, you are assumed to be automatically guilty, unless you can produce your papers. Don’t get me wrong, I completely understand how the law reads and that LEOs are basically given only one choice in how to handle it, but it’s basically an “on the street conviction” until you prove otherwise, therefore, guilty until proven innocent. That’s either very poorly written law, or very cleverly written law.

Yes, the guy was being a douche, and should have shown some common courtesy, but there is a fine line between reasonable suspicion and a “hunch”, which the arresting officer referenced as a Terry Stop, or “Terry v Ohio”. Don’t get me wrong, in this case I’m on the officer’s side, mainly because the guy didn’t really give him any choice. If the guy had talked to the cop and explained a little bit, I would have a serious problem with what was done. That being said, I still have a problem with how this went down.

SgtScott31, as you yourself said, a loaded firearm is NOT illegal if it’s being used in a hunting/shooting sport activity, or the firearm is being TRANSPORTED. Being in a locked case (granted a case that was made specifically to show the firearms profile, but still locked), slung over his shoulder, as he’s walking down the street, I’m pretty sure that would qualify as a firearm that is being transported, and therefore not subject to being checked for it being loaded/unloaded. I would agree with you on the stop and detain IF the firearm wasn’t in a locked case. But it was. And it was being transported. So that reasonable suspicion is gone, once you see it’s locked and secured.

The suppressor outline in the case is where the dude messed up. That is where the reasonable suspicion kicks in, NOT the loaded/unloaded locked and transported rifle. Now, if he had (said in German accent) produced his papers, and still been arrested, not cool. At that point (shown papers for suppressor and an obviously locked case) there is no longer a legally supported reasonable suspicion. You seem like a stand up dude SgtScott. Stay safe. And don’t tread on us. DSIII

I think the bullet proof vest is what caused all the attention from the cops that day. I mean, it’s not typical that someone open carries wearing a bullet proof vest. They probably thought you were on your way to do some mass shooting or robbery. I mean if I was a cop and saw someone wearing body armor with a gun on the street I know I would be concerned.

It might be legal to wear, but I think even you can admit, its suspicious at best.

Dale I have to recheck case law but I’m pretty sure it can be illegal to transport a loaded long gun in TN if its within reach in your vehicle. With that said it would have been illegal for him to walk around with it loaded at all. The question then is whether that crazy kydex case he had it in allows him easy access to a loaded rifle. That easily meets the terry standard until the officer could verify whether it was accessible and loaded. So in the process of the investigation the suppressor was discovered which is illegal just to have per 39-17-1302. Like I mentioned before if he simply would have shown that (a) it was unloaded and (b) proof he was allowed to have a suppressor I guarantee he would have been released by the officers. He locked the weapon so that they couldn’t determine if it was loaded and he refused to produce paperwork that he could legally own a suppressor. That’s PC for an arrest and that’s what happened. Now he can present paperwork in the preliminary hearing that shows he can legally own one. The charge will be dismissed but the officers actions at the time were completely reasonable and within their authority. No rights were violated. I would put money on it that no court, state or federal, is going to say otherwise. If Leonard has the money to blow more power to him. I’m glad he has so much time and money on his hands to waste everyone else’s time in the executive and judicial branches of government.

Scott, I just looked it up for myself and find it absolutely hilarious. You can open carry a rifle, if it does not have a round in the chamber or a magazine inserted. But at the same time, IT’S ILLEGAL TO CARRY A CLUB!!!! WTF are you “open carrying” if nothing more than a really expensive club at that point. Honestly, that’s just sad. And embarrassing.

After actually looking at the law, the officer had reasonable suspicion to inspect the rifle. No matter what, you can’t travel with a round in the chamber of a rifle. A pistol… that’s ok. But no rifle. Again, WTF? And get this, if you don’t have a concealed carry permit, you have to travel with the rifle Federal style, unloaded and ammo/magazines stored separate from the rifle. BUT, if you have a CC permit, then you get to put a magazine in the rifle, but still no round in the chamber!! That hasn’t done me a damn bit of good. Now it’s a slightly heavier expensive illegal club. Wow. I thought Tennessee had their shit together better than that.

All I gotta say is that I’m embarrassed for y’all. Poor Davy Crockett would be super embarrassed. Glad he came here, to Texas.

I lived in Tennessee for a few years and yes their weapon laws are pretty backwards. Tough fight getting things changed in Tennessee. Have to fight several cities of a political persuasion opposed to RKBA. Georgia and Alabama have managed to make changes in the past few years but Tennessee just can’t seem to do it.

BTW y’all in Texas need to keep watch. You’ve got some strange laws too (particularly knife laws) and the biggest state to state migration is people heading there from California. Colorado was free once. Then people started moving in.

Yep. People already talking about the influx from Cali to here. Colorado has served as a great example of what happens when you welcome retards. I’m doing my part to work towards, and waiting for the day when they’ll need a passport and work visa to come to Texas. But if it’s any of you sane folks on here, don’t worry, I’ll sponsor you. lol

Yea it’s different here. The 1307 statue specifies carrying with intent to go armed involving the “club.” The defenses to 1307 are in 1308. Now if I stop a car with a bat it all depends on circumstances. Baseball player with equip in backseat or gang member with it down between seat and front door? You get the picture.

So you can understand the frustration to the LEOs on scene when the gun had a lock on it specifically to prevent them from determining whether it was loaded and also refusing to prove he could legally own a suppressor. He’s not helping any cause involving firearms period.

ENDO-Mike, and those of you wanting to see how this should be done, I have found a page and videos that do just what you mentioned. They are done by a group called Open Carry Texas. The video’s “mood” tends to be dictated by the officer. Some are very friendly, others get more confrontational. Their most recent one is a great example. They’ve even got cards that they hand out to the officers. One of the page admins is the Sgt that was arrested in Temple, TX while out hiking with his kid. Good stuff.https://www.facebook.com/OpenCarryTexas?hc_location=stream